Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Once you go SSD you... go back?

C

Constantine1337

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 3, 2009
284
0
Hi,

I'm seriously thinking of swapping back the SSD and put the 500gig HDD back into my i5 2.53 MacBook Pro. Here are my reasons:

1. I use the samsung SSD (the same as the Apple Branded one)... The lack of TRIM is basically killing me. My SSD degrades to really low speeds and being a MAC user, I basically have to connect the SSD to a PC, then do a clean wipe to restore its speed. Basically, maintaining a SSD is much harder than an HDD. (and I don't have the cash for OWC/SandForce controller based SSD now)

2. I need some space. I have 128 GB with Win7 on it. I'm also sick of micro-managing every GB on my SSD in order not to fill it up (and also not writing those cells, thus not having to do Step 1 so often)


However... I will miss the silence. I love how silent my MacBook Pro is. And the speed is great... Battery life is going to go down...

Does anyone have any word of advice? Anyone can share his/hers downgrade experience, or maybe did you regret it?



Thanks,
Milan
 
WardC

WardC

macrumors 68030
Oct 17, 2007
2,727
215
Fort Worth, TX
Your SSD should not be degrading like that unless it's like 5 years old and you have been writing at least 10GB to it everyday.
 
rkmac

rkmac

macrumors 6502
Jun 22, 2009
413
0
JAFA, New Zealand
Check out the OWC data doubler.
I currently have a 60GB OWC Mercury Extreme Pro SSD with my OS's installed on it, and a 500GB Seagate Momentus XT with everything else on it where my Combo Drive used to be. It really is the best of both worlds. I would also recommend changing your current SSD to a Sandforce one if you can afford it, i've heard too many people say the Apple ones are quite a bit slower.
 
D

DeusInvictus7

macrumors 68020
Aug 13, 2008
2,377
28
Kitchener, Ontario
I went from a 160GB Intel X25-M to a Seagate Momentus XT 500GB, only because of the capacity, since I was running out of room. The only thing that is really noticeable, is the vibration/sound from a 7200RPM drive, compared to nothing from the SSD.

I am actually quite happy with the switch back. Once the XT knows what apps you run most often and such, it feels pretty close to having a SSD. Boot times are a couple seconds longer for me, but I barely ever reboot my Mac.
 
D

DeusInvictus7

macrumors 68020
Aug 13, 2008
2,377
28
Kitchener, Ontario
rgarjr said:
If you are hurting for space, get an optical bay caddy and stick your 500GB drive in it.
Click to expand...

Yeah I thought about doing that, but there are times that I need my optical drive when I'm not home and such. Maybe if things change then I'll do the dual drive setup, but for now, it's not an option.
 
E

Eddyisgreat

macrumors 601
Oct 24, 2007
4,851
2
WardC said:
Your SSD should not be degrading like that unless it's like 5 years old and you have been writing at least 10GB to it everyday.
Click to expand...

ya.

Samsung "like apple uses" and the one Apple uses (or toshiba) can be two different things. The one Apple uses should have some level of garbage collection. Not the fastest SSD on the block, but Apple needed an SSD that took this into account.
 
S

sentros

macrumors member
Oct 29, 2009
55
0
Finland
Constantine1337 said:
My SSD degrades to really low speeds and being a MAC user, I basically have to connect the SSD to a PC, then do a clean wipe to restore its speed. Basically, maintaining a SSD is much harder than an HDD. (and I don't have the cash for OWC/SandForce controller based SSD now)
Click to expand...

I'm sorry to say this but I'm very sceptical about this. The speed degradation comes after a loooong time of re-writes and even a speed degredated SSD will be way faster with a big margin compared to any HDD in the market. I've had my SSD in my Mac for 5 months now and geekbench show little to no speed degredation in that time.

Constantine1337 said:
2. I need some space. I have 128 GB with Win7 on it. I'm also sick of micro-managing every GB on my SSD in order not to fill it up (and also not writing those cells, thus not having to do Step 1 so often)
Click to expand...

This should've been a well known limitation of the SSD and should've been considered prior to purchase/installation and there's really no way around this without using additional external storage.
 
U

uncletoby

macrumors newbie
Sep 16, 2010
17
0
TRIM support is a moot issue with Macs as OSX has a superior data management system. It doesn't leave trash around that needs to be picked up.

I'll never own a computer that doesn't at least boot off a SSD again. My 15" MBP has a 120 gig OWC Mercury Pro SSD, with a 32 gig Windows 7 partition (and the 500 gig that came with the system in the optical bay). It loads cold into OSX in about thirty seconds, reboots into Windows 7 in about 45 seconds. Apps load crazy fast too. Everything just runs beautifully. Worth every penny.
 
C

Constantine1337

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 3, 2009
284
0
Well firstly, my SSD does degrade, but its true, it is still faster than an HDD. I'm actually thinking about buying an OWC SSD, the smaller one and getting a 500GB with optibay in (since I have a MacBook Air Superdrive which I hacked to work with MacBook Pro, I'm covered there). The only problem is, I can't buy OWC SSD in Germany... nobody sells it -.-

Didn't OCZ bring out OWC comparable SSD just few weeks ago?
 
rkmac

rkmac

macrumors 6502
Jun 22, 2009
413
0
JAFA, New Zealand
Constantine1337 said:
The only problem is, I can't buy OWC SSD in Germany... nobody sells it -.-
Click to expand...

I'm sure they will ship to Germany on the OWC website. They shipped to New Zealand and it took less than 5 days, I was really surprised. And it was still cheaper shipped all the way here than buying a slower SSD of comparable size in New Zealand.
 
V

vant

macrumors 65816
Jul 1, 2009
1,231
1
Wait for the X25-M 3G.

Buy the 300GB/600GB at a ridiculously low price (compared to today's per GB).

???

PROFIT!
 
C

Constantine1337

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Dec 3, 2009
284
0
Intel SSDs should push prices down... but who knows when they'll introduce them. Were there any rumors about the price range?
 
tibi08

tibi08

macrumors 6502a
Sep 17, 2007
703
75
Brighton, UK
milan03 said:
In August 2011. I'm sure by then all the other players will have the equivalent SSD available as well.
That's 10-11 months wait time. Good luck with that.
Click to expand...

No patience? The best things come to those who wait..... especially those who already have an X25-M G1 ;)
 
E

Eddyisgreat

macrumors 601
Oct 24, 2007
4,851
2
CrackedButter said:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/apple/2010/07/01/mac-ssd-performance-trim-in-osx/1

There is truth to what uncletoby is saying.
Click to expand...

That article has been picked apart by individuals especially if you look at the comments and know a thing or two about SSDs.


The Macbook Air we received from Apple had previously been sent to other reviewers, so we first needed to get the SSD into a "clean" state. While we have an established way of doing with Windows systems - using HDDerase to perform a low level format - we needed to find a way of doing this with OS X. The OS X installer actually allows you to load an app called Disk Utility, which can partition and format the drive - and one of the options is for a format which zeroes all the data.

According to Apple, "the "Zero all data" option... takes the erasure process to the next level by converting all binary in the empty portion of the disk to zeros, a state that might be described as digitally blank." The next level? Count. Us. In.
Click to expand...

Really? Remind me to stay away from these reviewers in the future. He seemed to know his stuff, too. I'm not really sure how they really thought that the SECURE_ERASE command that should take about thirty seconds on a smallish ssd is the same as a zero write which could take an hour or two.

I think these these comments say it best:
phics said:
As others have suggested, you can't write data through the SSD controller to properly wipe NAND chips. Rather, you need to 'secure erase' the drive through hardware. Pull the drive and do it from another machine if necessary.

Your 'wiped' drive is probably behaving as if it's completely full, thus nullifying any tests after the fact.

There should be some understanding of how SSD's work here... writing zeros to a 'disk' is not the same as wiping NAND chips in a Solid State Drive to make that space available for writing - which is ultimately what you need to accomplish.
Click to expand...
bofthew said:
You guy's really compare the performance of an operating System that supports TRIM (Windows/Linux) with an OS that currently doesn't (OSX) on a SSD that _DOESN'T_SUPPORT_ TRIM in the first place ?
Why did you actually publish this article ? How it is surprising that you measured no big differences in performance ?
Do a valid test ! Don't just measure baseless values and publish them for the sake of it.
Click to expand...
oceanwaves7 said:
I liked your first article that this one refers to. And this is nice, but the statement, "an OS that doesn't appear to be affected by SSD performance degradation" - I see this as sort of a flaw in this article, and is misleading, but saved by the fact that the last few paragraphs say that it will be looked into further. So I hope you do. But in saying that, your article is already being quoted as gospel in other articles that are proud of the misinformation. In fact, that's how I found this.

But It's the hardware and the speed of that hardware that matter, not the OS. The slow down happens at the SSD cell level, not the OS level. Also file fragmentation doesn't result in noticeable slow downs on SSD because there is no physical head that has to move around anyway. At least not a 47% drop. that drop has far more to do with the SSD and how it handles it's data blocks.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom